SUBHAN KHAN Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THERE are concurrent findings of courts below that prosecution has failed to bring home the guilty of accused (respondents 2 to 6) for offences punishable under sections 143, 147, 148, 504, 448, 323, 427 and 506 r/w 149 IPC. I have heard the learned counsel for parties.

(2.) THE law 13 fairly well settled that this court while exercising revisional jurisdiction under Section 401 Cr.P.C., does not sit as a court of second appeal. This court can interfere with the impugned judgment if the courts below have committed glaring errors in appreciation of evidence or errors of law resulting manifest injustice to petitioner. It is also well settled principle of law that revisional court is the court of correctional jurisdiction. In the case on hand, trial court has not considered the evidence of PW 1 to PW 3 and PW 10 on the ground that they are interested witnesses. The learned Judge of I -appellate court should have re -appreciated the evidence. The learned Judge of I -appellate court has failed to notice this mistake committed by trial court. In addition to this, learned Judge of I -appellate court has held that there is inconsistency between oral evidence and medical evidence for the reason that cut injuries were not found on the injured, though it is stated that accused (respondents 2 to 6) assaulted them with cycle chain.